Can I just express my disappointment at the lack of response from Muse with regard to the above query, which has been raised by several users.

It's all very well sending me emails to tell me how great V 1.8 is, and how I can use Omnisphere, BFD 2 etc etc on my Receptor; however, I DO NOT OWN Receptor 2 and at the moment I have no inclination to buy one.

I, like a lot of users, bought the original device and helped Muse to gain representation in the market; unfortunately, we are being left behind, as the company seems to focus all its attention on the new product. Fine, I realise that they have to publicise it as much as possible, but please spare a thought for longer standing users, who, in the current climate, do not have the money to buy a Receptor v.2.

I would like Muse to address the following queries as soon as possible :

1, When do they expect 1.8 to be available (via upgrade) on Receptor 1 versions ?

2. What will the pricing be for the upgrade and new drive ?

3. How has Omnisphere performed on v 1.8 - is it still running slow and if so, when do they expect this issue to be resolved ?

Thanks for your time

Peter

I don't know why I didn't see this post before.



+1.

Bump

...we'll just have to cross our fingers and wait (some more).

Thank you for posting this question, Peter1960. i have the SAME question and it burns at me. i feel exactly like you.

i personally had never gotten Receptor 1 to integrate comfortably into my studio setup because the integrator plugin was just not reliable enough. i know part of this is network bandwidth so i dedicated an entire network connection (my motherboard has two) to a crossover patch cable to the Receptor so there'd be no competition for bandwidth and even tried to set up a monitor and keyboard to keep myself from using the VNC viewer (also to hopefully save bandwidth).

Things never seemed to work out as reliably as needed.

Now the plugin is left in the dust, as an older version of a 32-bit plugin, for Receptor 1. i am running 64-bit Sonar (since Sonar's first 64-bit version and i'm not going back to 32-bit; NI are making that choice easier with their -late- conversion to 64-bit support, finally).

Receptor was a speculative purchase for me and it has been an interesting observation but ultimate disappointment because it never integrated into my workflow. My last hope is to use it as a repository for 32-bit plugs (getting them off my studio machine, those which are compatible) and as a standalone instrument/audio processor, but several plugs (as stated above) wont work on it because the system version for the Receptor 1 is NOT updated and on par with Receptor 2.

i was told that the full set of Native Instruments plugs would be fully supported on Receptor (not as Komplete) but not told that this would only happen on Receptor 2. i feel mislead. i wanted to install my NI stuff onto my receptor and it seems that only Komplete users or Receptor 2 owners will be able to do this. i'm talking about the NI stuff prior to the MOST RECENT updates (but i intend to update, so i would like those included ie: Kontakt 4, Absynth 5, Guitar Rig 4 Pro).

i feel a bit of animosity towards Muse. i bought the unit, several plugs, converted several licenses over to Receptor, etc... i think i contributed a bit here and would like to see more support continued for Receptor 1. If they will NOT do this at all, ever, i at least want a TECHNICAL EXPLANATION (be that system compatibility from moving from AMD to Intel or development resources needing to be funneled into Receptor 2 because of blahblahblah).

i also do not have the money (i've since gone on disability) to upgrade or purchase a Receptor 2. i want what was declared as "upcoming features" for Receptor 1 to be there on Receptor 1. Finish it.

so... "BUMP!"

*Bump*

I have an audio card that went bad on my receptor and was told I needed to send it in for repair. I asked to see if I could get my OS updated to 1.8 at the same time and this was the reply.

Rick Escobar
(Plugorama Support)
Monday
November 2, 2009
02:12 PM

Kyle,

It's unknown if the Rev C would ever be able to run the 1.8 OS due to problems with the BIOS.

Rick

I've never spent so much money on a product only to have the company move on within a year and a half and leave my product not working as advertised (no Ivory) with no reasonable upgrade path. I know someone will mention that I could upgrade to Receptor 2 but I don't need additional performance. I just need my current hardware to work well with commonly used VI's (as advertised). This all makes me feel like I've been hoodwinked and taken advantage of. That's enough to make me go out of my way to tell people that Muse is not a company you can trust. Buy their product if you want but don't expect everything to work as advertised.

...awesome.... before i bought the thing (2 or 3+ years ago) i was told that they had amplitube 2 up and running and were on the verge of releasing it as that was the plugin i used for my guitar...well....

i think it's time to sell this expensive monitor stand off and never look back (and unfortunately let everyone else i know to stay away).

the lack of responses from muse about this issue is very, very disheartening as we all know that they are active on these boards and usually respond with "hey...we don't have an answer but we're working on it" right away. it's been weeks now with them basically ignoring these threads. but imo, that's better then the eternal "we're working on it with no date" post that i'm way too used to from them.

who knows, maybe someone will respond here shortly and let us know that all us v1 users aren't left in the dust and will upgrade our systems (because i doubt i can justify spending more money just to get the box working the way i was told it should have years ago)--maybe they'll surprise us.

WTF, Rick? You know damn well that Fedora Linux, the operating system that the 1.8 OS is based on, will run on IDE drives. If there really is a problem with booting SATA drives, then tell Receptor Rev. C users that they can't upgrade to the SATA drive option, and release an ISO install image with the operating system so that we can use the same drives we already have in our Receptors to run the 1.8 OS.

This is sickening. I was told nearly a year ago when I bought my Receptor that the 1.8 OS would be made available for my Receptor. If I had known that Muse Research couldn't keep that promise, then I wouldn't have bought my Receptor. I'd like my money back.

I wish I had the time and money to write a VST host, create a Fedora Remix CD optimized for Muse Receptors, and release it as an open source project.

BrainSpawn Forte is a hugely capable live VST host, and someone's gotten it working in Ubuntu and Wine with Windows VSTs. With some hacking, drivers, etc, it would be cool to get it running on Receptor.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvkcmoqtYoE

http://www.brainspawn.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=2384&p=1 4518&hilit=linux#p14518

Wow, how epically lame is this new piece of info?

projektio

BrainSpawn Forte may be capable software, but it's a commercial product. If I was to somehow find a way to invest time in a project like this, then I'd want to make it available to everyone, and get the open source community involved in making enhancements to the product.

VST Host is certainly capable and much less expensive (i.e. free). I also have Steinberg's VStack working just fine in Linus/Wine...what is the point? With the coming release of Core i7 laptops for under $1400 I do not see any reason to continue grappling with running Windows applications in an emulated environment (or at least interpreted). EnergyXT is also a capable 'native' VST Host worthy of exploration for any platform (Mac, Windows, Linux). A few more:

Bidule
Cantabile
Chainer
EffectChainer
AirRack
JUCE
MiniHost
MuLab
Usine
TemperVST
LiveProfessor
SpaceToad

There are more, but I think you get the idea.

JR

'wine' is not an emulated or interpreted environment. It's a compatibility layer that takes care of system calls, loading DLLs, etc.

PC architecture runs the same machine code instructions regardless of the running operating system. So, much of the machine code generated by Windows compilers (DLLs, .exe's, etc.) can be run the same way as code generated by Linux compilers, even if the Windows code is being run under a Linux operating system. 'wine' takes care of loading the data from DLLs and .exe files, and loads compatible libraries for the code. So, in the case where Windows code being run under 'wine' isn't actually making calls to external libraries, it runs just the same (and just as fast!) as it does under Windows.

This is particularly convenient for running VSTs, as the majority of good, real-time audio code doesn't (and shouldn't!) make system calls.

Still, I get your point about the i7 laptops.



EnergyXT does run natively under Linux; however, last I checked, it only loads VSTs that are also Linux-native. Same with Renoise.

Many of the VST hosts you listed look interesting, but none of them, save for JUCE, is open source and extensible, and JUCE seems to be focused on loading Linux-native VSTs. IIRC, VSTHost used to be open sourced, but the author got sick of people taking his changes and not giving him credit.

It's all moot though. The thing about wishing to have the time and the money to do these things is that wishing doesn't generally help much.

Bump